Here is the result on my IVB laptop: I run some cycle burning workload on CPU0:
$ taskset -c 0 noploop & $ sudo syst_count -e unhalted_reference_cycles,unhalted_core_cycles -p -d 10 -c 0 <press CTRL-C to quit before 10s time limit> # 1s ----- CPU0 G0 2 594 304 518 2 594 304 518 unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0,00%, ena=1 000 736 581, run=1 000 736 581) CPU0 G0 2 594 304 951 2 594 304 951 unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0,00%, ena=1 000 736 581, run=1 000 736 581) # 2s ----- CPU0 G0 5 188 602 874 2 594 298 356 unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0,00%, ena=2 001 469 769, run=2 001 469 769) CPU0 G0 5 188 604 369 2 594 299 418 unhalted_core_cycles (scaling 0,00%, ena=2 001 469 769, run=2 001 469 769) As you can see, we are in the billions. Also this shows that my core-i5 does not have Turbo mode. ref cycles = core cycles. On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:16 AM, Sun, Yongjie <yongjie....@intel.com> wrote: > Can you show me the result in your server? And your CPU? > > -----Original Message----- > From: Stephane Eranian [mailto:eran...@googlemail.com] > Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 10:12 AM > To: Sun, Yongjie > Cc: perfmon2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net > Subject: Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P count error > > On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 3:09 AM, Sun, Yongjie <yongjie....@intel.com> wrote: >> Dmesg output: >> >> Performance Events: PEBS fmt1+, SandyBridge events, Intel PMU driver. >> PAX: PMU arbitration service v1.0.1 has been started. >> sep3_10: PMU collection driver v3.10.3 (EMON INTERNAL) has been loaded. >> sep3_10: IDT vector 0x40 will be used for handling PMU interrupts. >> clearing PMU state on CPU#15 >> clearing PMU state on CPU#8 >> >> >> syst_count output: same like: >> >> CPU0 G0 8,886,925 8,886,925 unhalted_core_cycles >> (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,291,924, run=1,000,291,924) >> CPU0 G0 0 0 >> unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,291,924, >> run=1,000,291,924) > > I think both counts are too low. In 1s you got on 9 million cycles..... > If the cpu is really busy it should be in the billions. > So something is broken. > Can you reboot your system AND NOT load the sep driver (VTUNE) and rerun the > test? > >> # 1s ----- >> CPU1 G0 2,955,018 2,955,018 unhalted_core_cycles >> (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,319,397, run=1,000,319,397) >> CPU1 G0 0 0 >> unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,319,397, >> run=1,000,319,397) >> # 1s ----- >> CPU2 G0 162,771 162,771 unhalted_core_cycles >> (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,317,563, run=1,000,317,563) >> CPU2 G0 0 0 >> unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,317,563, >> run=1,000,317,563) >> # 1s ----- >> CPU3 G0 318,645 318,645 unhalted_core_cycles >> (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,314,571, run=1,000,314,571) >> CPU3 G0 0 0 >> unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,314,571, >> run=1,000,314,571) >> # 1s ----- >> CPU4 G0 160,486 160,486 unhalted_core_cycles >> (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,312,981, run=1,000,312,981) >> CPU4 G0 0 0 >> unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,312,981, >> run=1,000,312,981) >> # 1s ----- >> CPU5 G0 448,774 448,774 unhalted_core_cycles >> (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,311,395, run=1,000,311,395) >> CPU5 G0 0 0 >> unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,311,395, >> run=1,000,311,395) >> # 1s ----- >> CPU6 G0 149,396 149,396 unhalted_core_cycles >> (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,307,538, run=1,000,307,538) >> CPU6 G0 0 0 >> unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,307,538, >> run=1,000,307,538) >> # 1s ----- >> CPU7 G0 417,315 417,315 unhalted_core_cycles >> (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,303,946, run=1,000,303,946) >> CPU7 G0 0 0 >> unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,303,946, >> run=1,000,303,946) >> # 1s ----- >> CPU8 G0 720,604 720,604 unhalted_core_cycles >> (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,270,014, run=1,000,270,014) >> CPU8 G0 0 0 >> unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,270,014, >> run=1,000,270,014) >> # 1s ----- >> CPU9 G0 1,556,507 1,556,507 unhalted_core_cycles >> (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,266,053, run=1,000,266,053) >> CPU9 G0 0 0 >> unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,266,053, >> run=1,000,266,053) >> # 1s ----- >> CPU10 G0 14,548,713 14,548,713 unhalted_core_cycles >> (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,266,471, run=1,000,266,471) >> CPU10 G0 0 0 >> unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,266,471, >> run=1,000,266,471) >> # 1s ----- >> CPU11 G0 158,015 158,015 unhalted_core_cycles >> (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,261,804, run=1,000,261,804) >> CPU11 G0 0 0 >> unhalted_reference_cycles (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,000,261,804, >> run=1,000,261,804) >> >> -----Original Message----- >> From: Stephane Eranian [mailto:eran...@googlemail.com] >> Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 9:48 AM >> To: Sun, Yongjie >> Cc: perfmon2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >> Subject: Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P count error >> >> hi >> >> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:46 AM, Sun, Yongjie <yongjie....@intel.com> wrote: >>> >>> I have tried many os like Ubuntu, centos.. >>> Kernel versio is: both are the same result 3.5.0-49-generic >>> 2.6.32-358.el6.x86_64 >>> >> Send me the output of: >> sudo LIBPFM_VERBOSE=1 ./syst_count -e >> unhalted_core_cycles,unhalted_ref_cycles -p -d10 >> >> Also the output of: dmesg | fgrep PMU >> >> >>> -----Original Message----- >>> From: Stephane Eranian [mailto:eran...@googlemail.com] >>> Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 9:44 AM >>> To: Sun, Yongjie >>> Cc: perfmon2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>> Subject: Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P count error >>> >>> Hi, >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:39 AM, Sun, Yongjie <yongjie....@intel.com> wrote: >>>> Current the issue is: the CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P couted value is too small >>>> than CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P. is it right? From my understanding, it >>>> should be almost same. It is none of the workload business. >>>> >>> Which kernel is this running on? >>> UNHALTED_REF_CYCLES can only be measured on a fixed counter. So need kernel >>> support for this. >>> >>> >>>> -----Original Message----- >>>> From: Stephane Eranian [mailto:eran...@googlemail.com] >>>> Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 9:35 AM >>>> To: Sun, Yongjie >>>> Cc: perfmon2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>> Subject: Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P count error >>>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 2:31 AM, Sun, Yongjie <yongjie....@intel.com> wrote: >>>>> I try use the syst_count: >>>>> Result is same >>>>> >>>>> CPU0 G0 7,188,625 7,188,625 UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES >>>>> (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,999,298,896, run=1,999,298,896) >>>>> CPU0 G0 3 3 >>>>> UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,999,336,546, >>>>> run=1,999,336,546) >>>>> CPU0 G0 7,303,052 7,303,052 >>>>> CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,999,348,997, >>>>> run=1,999,348,997) >>>>> CPU0 G0 545,254 545,254 >>>>> CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P (scaling 0.00%, ena=1,999,364,938, >>>>> run=1,999,364,938) >>>>> >>>> But what is your workload doing and on which CPU does it run. >>>> Here it needs to run on CPU0. If you workload blocks and there is nothing >>>> else to run on CPU0, the processor goes in halted state, and the events >>>> you are measuring stop counting. >>>> >>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>> From: Stephane Eranian [mailto:eran...@googlemail.com] >>>>> Sent: Thursday, December 4, 2014 9:25 AM >>>>> To: Sun, Yongjie >>>>> Cc: perfmon2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>> Subject: Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P count error >>>>> >>>>> Hi, >>>>> >>>>> These Python scripts are all not maintained. >>>>> I suggest you use the perf_examples/syst_count program instead. >>>>> And you need to be root to run per-CPU (system-wide) measurments. >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Dec 4, 2014 at 1:34 AM, Sun, Yongjie <yongjie....@intel.com> >>>>> wrote: >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> I running on Intel SNB E5-2680 >>>>>> >>>>>> I just used the "libpfm-4.5.0/python/sys.py" >>>>>> ./sys.py -e >>>>>> UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES,UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES,CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:TH >>>>>> R >>>>>> E >>>>>> A >>>>>> D >>>>>> _P,CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P -c 0 >>>>>> Result: >>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES 3229292 >>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES 3 >>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P 3266550 >>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P 268798 >>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES 6834444 >>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES 3 >>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P 6897896 >>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P 568677 >>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES 10782920 >>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES 3 >>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P 10876957 >>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P 897739 >>>>>> -----Original Message----- >>>>>> From: Stephane Eranian [mailto:eran...@googlemail.com] >>>>>> Sent: Wednesday, December 3, 2014 12:33 AM >>>>>> To: Sun, Yongjie >>>>>> Cc: perfmon2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>> Subject: Re: [perfmon2] perfmon2 CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P count >>>>>> error >>>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> On Mon, Dec 1, 2014 at 6:24 AM, Sun, Yongjie <yongjie....@intel.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>>> Hi, all >>>>>>> I use the perfmon2 to count events >>>>>>> “UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES,UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES,CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P,CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P” >>>>>>> and got >>>>>> >>>>>> which CPU is this running on? >>>>>> How long does your test run? >>>>>> Are you running in system-wide or per-process mode? >>>>>> Need more context to answer your question. >>>>>> >>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES 5538707 >>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES 3 >>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P 5641229 >>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P 419607 >>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES 11661876 >>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES 3 >>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P 11813664 >>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P 911248 >>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_CORE_CYCLES 15682069 >>>>>>> CPU0: UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES 3 >>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P 15869779 >>>>>>> CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P 1246315 >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Two questions: 1. why UNHALTED_REFERENCE_CYCLES is 3? Too small >>>>>>> 2. why CPU0: CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:REF_P is much smaller >>>>>>> than CPU_CLK_UNHALTED:THREAD_P? this do not make sence! >>>>>>> >>>>>>> BTW: I count this for I want to count the CPU Frequency from Intel’s >>>>>>> DOC: >>>>>>> https://software.intel.com/en-us/articles/measuring-the-average-u >>>>>>> n >>>>>>> h >>>>>>> a >>>>>>> l >>>>>>> t >>>>>>> ed-frequency >>>>>>> Average frequency = >>>>>>> TSC_frequency * (CPU_CLK_UNHALTED.THREAD / CPU_CLK_UNHALTED.REF) >>>>>>> >>>>>>> So can anybody help on this question? >>>>>>> >>>>>>> >>>>>>> ----------------------------------------------------------------- >>>>>>> - >>>>>>> - >>>>>>> - >>>>>>> - >>>>>>> - >>>>>>> -------- Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade >>>>>>> BIRT Server from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business >>>>>>> Reports and Dashboards with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel >>>>>>> Exports, App Integration & more Get technology previously >>>>>>> reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE >>>>>>> http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=157005751&iu=/4140/ostg. >>>>>>> clktrk _______________________________________________ >>>>>>> perfmon2-devel mailing list >>>>>>> perfmon2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net >>>>>>> https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/perfmon2-devel >>>>>>> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------ Download BIRT iHub F-Type - The Free Enterprise-Grade BIRT Server from Actuate! Instantly Supercharge Your Business Reports and Dashboards with Interactivity, Sharing, Native Excel Exports, App Integration & more Get technology previously reserved for billion-dollar corporations, FREE http://pubads.g.doubleclick.net/gampad/clk?id=164703151&iu=/4140/ostg.clktrk _______________________________________________ perfmon2-devel mailing list perfmon2-devel@lists.sourceforge.net https://lists.sourceforge.net/lists/listinfo/perfmon2-devel
